Nick, I'll relate two stories and let you choose how you want to interpret things.

When I worked on a tv drama, we had a visit from a telephone engineer from Mercury (remember them?) who wanted to check our broadband connection.
Firstly, Mercury weren't trading at the time, secondly one of the researchers recognised him as a spook he'd interviewed a year prior.
The mobiles of the director, producer, art director and a few other members of the crew were all tapped, and I'll bet the researchers and production office were tapped as well. We'd be filming on location in London and get odd phone calls about what we were doing and how long the authorities would allow us to be there for - despite the fact we hadn't 'officially' lodged any filming schedule with the local authorities and were working in public areas in a very, very low key way deliberately not to attract attention. But somebody was watching.

My father called Labour Party HQ to ask some questions about Operation Mason and David Kelly.
The next day, in our tiny village in the arse end of Devon that doesn't even have street lights, we're treated to a Police car parked outside our house for two days (in a cul de sac of 6 houses) and 'British Telecom' lifting manhole covers.

Now, this is personal experience, but yes, we are watched.
The intelligence services don't just sit back and wait for the nod to start looking, it's an active and ongoing process.

I'm definitely against.

Firstly I don't really see the point. All the arguments about counterterrorism, immigration, ID theft and so on are either bunk, or there's plenty of other ways to solve these problems that don't require a huge multi-billion pound project.

Secondly, I wouldn't trust the muppets in charge with so much as my phone number if I could help it, never mind all my personal details, all stored in one convenient place. How long before the first ID card database set gets lost in the post?

Thirdly, it's the feature creep that worries me. Apart from the above, I don't really see much issue in its present format, but how long will it stay that way? As Paulzolo pointed out, we'll soon have all the various databases (NHS, ID card, DVLA, passport and so on) merged, and then pretty much every government agency will be able to look up pretty much everything about you.

I know the above sounds fairly paranoid, but I've seen how, once a law is passed, government officials will find all sorts of exotic and interesting ways to interpret it to their own ends.

I'm against the idea, the main reasons have been listed above.

I think the system will be open to abuse, and I can't see how this is going to do/prevent half the stuff they're promising it will.

Prof, with all that already going on and perhaps more, why not have the ID scheme? For all we know it might all be up and running, with data pulled from various places...Getting the actual card could be more acceptance more than anything else?

If we don't have ID cards, what is to stop them monitoring VoIP calls? And that could still be tied to an Ip which has registered your name to that line, which can then be tied to a passport and hey presto, same scenario...

Do ID cards mean it will stop? No. Do ID cards mean it will get worse? No (it might, but it might not).

In fact, if the government are collecting data already, we might save money by using the ID card scheme, as the government wouldn't be trying to do it while walking on egg shells...

How much is this white elephant costing us now?

We're getting a while elephant!? Wow!

And there was I thinking it was a pink one

At the risk of sounding paranoid, apathetic and/or cynical, the govt. can do whatever the hell they want. We can't stop them. We've never had a choice really. All western govts have been in bed with telecomms from the outset. There are cameras everywhere now. Ultimately, they may not be watching any of us right now, but the amount of traffic that runs through GCHQ and the NSA is insane. It's like Sky+. If they aren't really watching a particular person, but then find a reason to do so, then can wind everything back and piece it together retrospectively. And they're not limited to 60 minutes of live pause/rewind time. Paul put it most eloquently earlier. Al, that's some interesting experience.

There's nothing to stop them intercepting VoIP calls (or any form of electronic comms). There's nothing to stop them tracking your movements. The central problem is this, we're skint as it is. EVEN IF, (and it's a BIG IF) you ignore the privacy/surveillance issues, this is going to cost a fortune for no benefit.

Crime will happen forever, as it's a fundamental human problem. If somebody really wants you tracked/robbed/dead, they can do it. They've been able to do it since the dawn of time, but as our civilisation evolves more and more technology, it's easier for the few to have power over the many. That's all. Government no longer serves the people, it serves itself.

[/rant]

My opinion is this : The government only has a right to the minimum amount of information about me that is required to provide services to me. The government is there to service me, not the other way around.

The government has no right to ask me where I'm going. The government only has the right to ask me what I'm doing if there is a real possibility I am doing something which is illegal. The government
has no right to know how much money I've got or what I spend it on. The government has no right to intercept or record any conversation I have (in any medium) unless, again, there is a real possibility I am in the process of committing a crime.

The idea I should have to prove anything at all to the government unless I want something in return is abhorrent and anti-democratic.

The 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' argument is bunk. It implies we as people in the UK have no right to privacy from the government or those who work on it's behalf, which we demonstrably do. We have a right to privacy full stop and who is asking is irrelevant. The fact person or persons unknown may be committing a crime does not of itself give the government any more rights to invade our privacy than any other time.


Jon

Hear hear!

+1

Another vote of approval for Jonbwfc's post!!!

We're already seeing a lot of feature creep in the name of the 'war on terrorism'. Trouble is I am totally unconvinced most of it has actually made any real difference except to give the terrorists a soft victory in adversely affecting our lives.

Politicians are elected by the people to serve the people. I really wish they'd remember that more often.

Richard.

Nah they forget that as soon as they are voted in

I think this stink regarding expenses is as close as we've got to real democracy ( the people spoke ) in many many years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8060003.stm

I'm in favour of ID cards as a voluntary programme, I would want one personally for the reasons lacloss and big-d state, paranoid scaremongering some of this is.

I do however think the problem with labour is the ecessive need for what is unnecessary control resulting from a severe distrust in people's ability to manage themselves, thier lives and work. Some of this is shown in the gov't regulation that occurs in the work place; eg. people having to get unnecessary qualifications in various trades such as taxi driving nvqs; eg health and safety regulation. Databases because they don't trust say local GPs to hold medical records. Relentless box ticking programmes and ever expanding red tape is ridiculous. Compulsary ID cards are yet another sceme to protect people from themselves. Furthermore the extensive and never ending advertising campaigns on the TV for everything and anything that is harmful; cross the road, looking for motorbikes, tax warnings. This relentless tirade of pointless control, regulation and information is inflating the country's budget unnecessarily and turning us into a nanny state.

I can't even think about ID cards without becoming incensely raged.

What needs to happen is someone walks up with that silly b*tch with a duplicate ID and appearance and shoot the b*tch.

It'd show the weakness of the ID card.